Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[wierd]

No. Interrupting the breaker will do it.

Janitor man downstairs can easily do the deed.

[smjjames]

That requires a lot of coordination, what if the janitor/groundskeeper isn't anywhere near the breaker to do that (especially if it's a large school) in time? Realistically, every school would have to find their own strategy of dealing with the hypothetical here.

[wierd]

True enough.

I was just giving one possible solution to the problem that did not involve bodyslams.  Naturally, there will be others as well.

[Harry Baldman]

Maybe we should consider if the kid is doing something deserving of being tackled, it might be their own fault. They need to learn NOT to do those things and then they won't get gravel in their face. Granted, if the tackling was unwarranted, then yes, punish the authority figure who did it. But I feel like that would be the rarity.

Because authority figures in schools are so famously competent and reliable, and punitive violence has such a great track record in discipline and education.

I mean holy shit, maybe it's no wonder school is turning into prison when this is what somebody somehow believes.

[Egan_BW]

Maybe adults hurting children doesn't become okay when the child starts it, yeah?

[wierd]

That's a slippery slope.

See also:  High profile shooting of a month ago-- security guard did not shoot at student with gun.

There has to be a point where hurting the child is accepted. Where the line gets drawn is up to society, but there must in fact be one.

[Trekkin]

That's a slippery slope.

See also:  High profile shooting of a month ago-- security guard did not shoot at student with gun.

There has to be a point where hurting the child is accepted. Where the line gets drawn is up to society, but there must in fact be one.

Ah, but see, that's an attempt to find a solution to the problem. We don't do that anymore. We virtue signal about how important the problem is and condescendingly explain why other people are stupid for suggesting solutions to it instead; there's a much lower risk of failure that way.

[smjjames]

He didn't not shoot at the student with the gun, he wasn't even in the building.

The problem is that guns tend to be, well, lethal, and should only be used as an extreme extreme (not a typo) last resort. The great majority of day to day incidents don't require guns.

That's a slippery slope.

See also:  High profile shooting of a month ago-- security guard did not shoot at student with gun.

There has to be a point where hurting the child is accepted. Where the line gets drawn is up to society, but there must in fact be one.

Ah, but see, that's an attempt to find a solution to the problem. We don't do that anymore. We virtue signal about how important the problem is and condescendingly explain why other people are stupid for suggesting solutions to it instead; there's a much lower risk of failure that way.

Or perhaps the problem is that the politicians are the ones who get to come up with ideas and choose them.

[Harry Baldman]

That's a slippery slope.

See also:  High profile shooting of a month ago-- security guard did not shoot at student with gun.

There has to be a point where hurting the child is accepted. Where the line gets drawn is up to society, but there must in fact be one.

That definitely is a slippery slope argument, yes. But maybe instead of considering the best method of making children suffer a little more time should be devoted to providing them less shitty spaces to exist in?

Ah, but see, that's an attempt to find a solution to the problem. We don't do that anymore. We virtue signal about how important the problem is and condescendingly explain why other people are stupid for suggesting solutions to it instead; there's a much lower risk of failure that way.

How dare people bring up basic human decency and the last century or so of child-rearing scholarship in this civilized and pragmatic pedagogical debate, you're right.

[wierd]

The pragmatist looks at both.

Ideally, you correct the problem by prevention. (children dont suffer, and thus do not get pushed to breaking, so violence never happens)  For the cases where prevention is insufficient (you can never completely eliminate the causal factors of violence, so violence will always manifest, just at lower baseline levels), you need well defined protocols.

[bloop_bleep]

What did I just say? You think a person of stature with combat training can't break up a fight in any other manner? If it was your mother and her sister fighting, would you tackle one of them into a concrete floor?

Get real. One of the very first lessons I got in my foray into martial arts was a restraining hold, which was specifically introduced as how to stop an attacker without causing them lasting harm. If I, a beginner, was given such a lesson, someone who sticks to it in a professional context can sure as shit do the same.

Here's another thing that gets me: Thinking that even if something is "absolutely necessary" that everybody should just absorb the consequences. It doesn't really matter that we teach kids they'll face brutal violence to ensure compliance, that's ok because they might kill each other otherwise! Scary!

You don't seem to understand the situation in the more underfunded schools in areas with poverty and crime. There are kids that stab each other with knives, brutally beat people with clubs, and many other different kinds of almost-murder. So yes, in fact they will kill each other. I'm against using physical violence in lesser circumstances, but by the time you're swinging at someone with a knife, the immediate priority has moved from "teaching kids to respect each other" to "making sure no-one dies." Therapy and other such measures can be administered after the fact, but at the moment the goal is to prevent this person from hurting anyone else. If my sister had a knife and was ready to kill my mother, I would do the exact same thing.

Besides, in these circumstances, the officer has very, very little time, even a tenth of a second, to react. Flinging your body at the attacker is the most instinctive and the fastest response. I doubt the girl would get any serious injuries from that, perhaps a couple stitches in a couple places, but the overall result would be much better if the knife strike was allowed to hit.

[wierd]

Again, the ideal solution is to combat the poverty which promotes the violence. 

There is a reason why I had it as priority number 2 on my suggested fix list. (Priority 1 falls into it, since it too is a social service reform, and one that is desperately needed in the US.)

[Lord Shonus]

Abuses happen. Force is not always used appropriately. There is no room to actually discuss the idea until that fact is acknowledged.

[wierd]

I dont think I have ever argued that the school system is comprised of misunderstood saints.

I want their authoritarianism to get shoved right up their tight wrinkled assholes, personally.
But on the flipside, I acknowledge that there must in fact be a demarcation line where force against a child is not only accepted, but encouraged.

[bloop_bleep]

Abuses happen. Force is not always used appropriately. There is no room to actually discuss the idea until that fact is acknowledged.

Police sometimes abuse their positions, therefore they are useless and serve no purpose.